Things have settled down now, but some observers say city’s ombudsman should have jurisdiction..

The Toronto Public Library system may be the envy of the world, with a legion of staunch defenders, as Doug Ford discovered back in 2011 when he made dismissive remarks about the need for local branches.

But it also gets its share of complaints — which suddenly tripled in 2012, the Star has learned.

Library patrons irate at being charged $1 for not picking up items were a big part of that surge. Complaints over the availability of electronic books and similar materials soared too, as the library continued to boost Internet-based services.

Library records obtained by the Star show complaints leapt to 7,627 in 2012, from just 2,191 in 2011, but dropped back to 3,875 in 2013 as patrons adapted to the changes. In each of those years, the library had about 19 million visits.

Circulation complaints, which include issues involving fines, jumped to 2,551 in 2012 from 188 in 2011, an increase of more than 1,200 per cent.

Negative feedback about electronic services soared to 3,327 in 2012, from just 821 in 2011.

“The large majority of those complaints, about both collections and about access to services, (in) particular electronic services, were a result of our inability to provide e-materials to customers in a way that they wanted or that they weren’t able to access them,” said Paul Trumphour, the library’s manager of access and information.

“When you get . . . a scarcity of a resource that is popular, there is sometimes friction, and that’s what we experienced in 2012.”

Trumphour said the numbers may be somewhat inflated because calls made to the library’s Answerline service for technical support with e-materials were logged as complaints. The same queries made in person to staff would not have been recorded as a comment.

In January 2012, the library hiked fines on adult, teen and children’s materials. That July, it also began fining patrons $1 for each item placed on hold but never picked up.

“People were surprised by it. They didn’t understand it and they complained about it,” said Trumphour. “Materials were sitting on the shelves for long periods of time, and then people (were) not picking them up and then we have to send them back to their home branch.”

By 2013, complaints about the fines had decreased by about half, which Trumphour attributed to email notifications of due dates and available holds. The number of holds not picked up dropped by more than half last year.

When the Star filed a freedom of information request to obtain copies of library complaints, the cost was set at $2,853 to process and redact data for the first quarter of 2014 — fees established by legislation. After discussions with the library, the Star obtained a small sample of complaints at no cost.

These ranged from a complaint about out-of-service computers at Northern District branch to an objection to the library carrying NOW magazine, on the grounds that it allegedly “degrades women and promotes prostitution,” as the complainant wrote.

Another wrote: “How come I buy a book from Kobo or Kindle and have no issues? I borrow a book from the library and it takes a rocket scientist to install it and I can’t even read it without constant problems?”

A Palmerston branch patron wrote of a borrowed book that “the pages are covered in something that looks as though someone ate a meal and used the book as a napkin. Truly disgusting.”

Letters to the library board also provide insight into patrons’ beefs.

One writer complained about the “defacement” of library materials through the poor placement of RFID (radio frequency identification device) tags, another about the possibility of paid parking at the Fairview branch.

Board chair Michael Foderick said he would like to see patrons’ complaints handled by an ombudsman, ideally the city’s. “I’ve been contacted by a lot of people, dozens since having become chair,” said Foderick. “People who have complaints about how they’ve been treated at the library, and I don’t know whether some of those have merit or not. …

“Our staff are excellent, our staff are doing the best they can, but inevitably there are some issues which are properly addressed to an ombudsman.”

The vast majority of complaints are handled at the local level and might then be reviewed by a supervisor and up the chain of command. “It’s an escalated response,” said Trumphour. “There aren’t that many issues that don’t get resolved at that level.”

Councillor Sarah Doucette, who sits on the library board, isn’t against having the city ombudsman oversee the library but believes it’s unnecessary. “We already have a process for people who have complaints. I am happy with that process,” said Doucette. “Our library staff are very good at dealing with concerns, with complaints and giving answers.”

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.